The implementation of the CJEU’s Joined Cases Aranyosi and Caldararu by the UK and Irish Courts – A real impact on the protection of fundamental rights in surrender proceedings?

Abstract

This article explores the subsequent change in balance between efficiency and fundamental rights protection in surrender proceedings following the Joined Cases Aranyosi and Caldararu. The impact of Aranyosi and Caldararu on the UK courts examines the UK’s implementation of the two-tier test in surrender proceedings prior to Brexit under the EAW system and Extradition Act 2003. It argues that despite Aranyosi institutionalising the use of assurances, the system does not lead to an actual improvement of fundamental rights protection as firstly, assurances are often breached, and secondly, the UK Courts do not attribute weight to such breaches, maintaining trust in the relevant country in future cases. The impact of Aranyosi and Caldararu on the Irish courts analyses judicial decisions pre- Aranyosi and post- Aranyosi. It illustrates that by setting a very high threshold for the respondent to overcome to find a violation of fundamental rights successfully, there has not been a real impact on the protection of fundamental rights in surrender proceedings. Exploring how these national courts apply the CJEU’s standards of fundamental rights checks in surrender procedures provides real insight into whether Aranyosi has had a revolutionary impact in practice.